How about this crazy notion that the people responsible for bringing that child into the world, actually take care of that child.

I have four kids. Yet for some reason, I don't depend on daycare, food stamps, school lunch, etc.

I don't know from where it came, but I got this STTTRRRRAAAANNNGGGEEE concept that I and MY WIFE ane responsible for our kids.

But, per Carlin's stupid statements, we conservatives don't care about kids, because we don't want to be bliked, caring for someone else's kiddies, by having our paychecks fleeced, wasted by government, and the crumbs going to help the poor (many of whom REMAIN POOR, in perpetuity).

Another classic case of liberalism: Choice without consequence. The right to screw, without the responsibilities of caring for the kids THEY PRODUCE (as if they forgot that having sex is how we make babies around here

"I would like to ban the word liberal, because people who are called liberals aren’t liberal about anything except hard drugs, sex, and spending other people’s money. Otherwise, they want to control your life. That should be really, really clear to everybody." - David Howoritz

How about this crazy notion that the people responsible for bringing that child into the world, actually take care of that child.

I have four kids. Yet for some reason, I don't depend on daycare, food stamps, school lunch, etc.

I don't know from where it came, but I got this STTTRRRRAAAANNNGGGEEE concept that I and MY WIFE ane responsible for our kids.

But, per Carlin's stupid statements, we conservatives don't care about kids, because we don't want to be bliked, caring for someone else's kiddies, by having our paychecks fleeced, wasted by government, and the crumbs going to help the poor (many of whom REMAIN POOR, in perpetuity).

Another classic case of liberalism: Choice without consequence. The right to screw, without the responsibilities of caring for the kids THEY PRODUCE (as if they forgot that having sex is how we make babies around here

"I would like to ban the word liberal, because people who are called liberals aren’t liberal about anything except hard drugs, sex, and spending other people’s money. Otherwise, they want to control your life. That should be really, really clear to everybody." - David Howoritz

I see Carlin's point went right over your head. He isn't saying anything about responsibility of the parents (strawman there buddy), he is simply pointing out that the intense interest the right has with someones unborn child does not seem to carry over to after birth. Your point actually highlights, this, to you it's the parents responsibility when born (I agree) yet you seem to think they don't have this right/responsibility for the unborn. You are putting wasted energy into zygotes when real living children are struggling in the world. Many proponents of the right want to outlaw volunteer abortions, which kinda highlights this point further.

fuck off telling people what they can do with there bodies and womb's.

Good point. You should tell that to the Bible Belt red conservative states seeing how they rank in the top 10 of all states as far as teen pregnancies, high school drop out rates, and taking more $$$ from the Federal gov't than they pay into the system goes.

I see Carlin's point went right over your head. He isn't saying anything about responsibility of the parents (strawman there buddy), he is simply pointing out that the intense interest the right has with someones unborn child does not seem to carry over to after birth. Your point actually highlights, this, to you it's the parents responsibility when born (I agree) yet you seem to think they don't have this right/responsibility for the unborn. You are putting wasted energy into zygotes when real living children are struggling in the world. Many proponents of the right want to outlaw volunteer abortions, which kinda highlights this point further.

fuck off telling people what they can do with there bodies and womb's.

The far right claims they believe in a small gov't and want gov't out of people's lives.

Unless of course it is used to regulate women, their vaginas, or who can get married.

I see Carlin's point went right over your head. He isn't saying anything about responsibility of the parents (strawman there buddy), he is simply pointing out that the intense interest the right has with someones unborn child does not seem to carry over to after birth. Your point actually highlights, this, to you it's the parents responsibility when born (I agree) yet you seem to think they don't have this right/responsibility for the unborn. You are putting wasted energy into zygotes when real living children are struggling in the world. Many proponents of the right want to outlaw volunteer abortions, which kinda highlights this point further.

fuck off telling people what they can do with there bodies and womb's.

Their bodies aren't being burned or dismembered; the unborn babies, however, are.

Living children are struggling in the world, in part, because of the very attitude that Carlin exhibited in that quote. Head start, food stamps, school lunch and welfare are all government programs, with the onus on those programs being a major lynchpin in taking care of children.

Conservatives are HARDLY against such programs. What they protest is people living off them in perpetuity, when those programs were designed to be TEMPORARY.

Their bodies aren't being burned or dismembered; the unborn babies, however, are.

Living children are struggling in the world, in part, because of the very attitude that Carlin exhibited in that quote. Head start, food stamps, school lunch and welfare are all government programs, with the onus on those programs being a major lynchpin in taking care of children.

Conservatives are HARDLY against such programs. What they protest is people living off them in perpetuity, when those programs were designed to be TEMPORARY.

no actual unborn babiesmaybe you're referring to a fetus which is not a baby

Repubs had no problem voting against (or trying to vote against) SCHIP

The far right claims they believe in a small gov't and want gov't out of people's lives.

Unless of course it is used to regulate women, their vaginas, or who can get married.

The far left claims they're "pro-choice" and want people to have freedom.

UNLESS, of course, it involves people:

- Using their tax dollars at the school of their choice for their kids- Keeping as much of their hard-earned money as possible- Opting their kids out of classes, pushing homosexual propaganda- Buying whatever guns and as much ammo, as they see fit, to defend themselves- Actually mentioning Jesus Christ, during the CHRISTMAS holiday- On the right, using the first amendment, as freely as those on the left do- Using the cheapest, most effeective energy source this country has

Good point. You should tell that to the Bible Belt red conservative states seeing how they rank in the top 10 of all states as far as teen pregnancies, high school drop out rates, and taking more $$$ from the Federal gov't than they pay into the system goes.

You forgot the part about the blue states having far higher abortion rates (thus many of their teen pregnancies go UNREPORTED).

Not to mention, as far as taking more federal money than paid into it, that's due to blue states hiking taxes up (which might explain why certain blue states are seeing mass exodus from their borders to red states with zero state taxes).

As far as welfare goes, that falls on the blue states, especially with California housing about a third of the nation's welfare cases. Per capita, five of the top 10 states/districts are blue, in terms of welfare recipients, namely DC, California, Maine, Rhode Island, and Washington (state).

You forgot the part about the blue states having far higher abortion rates (thus many of their teen pregnancies go UNREPORTED).

Not to mention, as far as taking more federal money than paid into it, that's due to blue states hiking taxes up (which might explain why certain blue states are seeing mass exodus from their borders to red states with zero state taxes).

As far as welfare goes, that falls on the blue states, especially with California housing about a third of the nation's welfare cases. Per capita, five of the top 10 states/districts are blue, in terms of welfare recipients, namely DC, California, Maine, Rhode Island, and Washington (state).

Why don't you quit posting BS like this (i.e. the time you claim I didn't post the source of an exit poll, even though the name of that source was in the first sentence)?

BTW - am I the only one who noticed that Straw didn't ask Lurker to post his sources for his statement?

Of course, Lurker also forgot to mention how many of those red states have fairly LARGE BLACK AND HISPANIC populations (those two demos, unfortunately lead the country in out-of-wedlock births; how do they vote again?).

Why don't you quit posting BS like this (i.e. the time you claim I didn't post the source of an exit poll, even though the name of that source was in the first sentence)?

BTW - am I the only one who noticed that Straw didn't ask Lurker to post his sources for his statement?

Of course, Lurker also forgot to mention how many of those red states have fairly LARGE BLACK AND HISPANIC populations (those two demos, unfortunately lead the country in out-of-wedlock births; how do they vote again?).

how about you just stop whining and post a link when you make a claim or multiple claims

Doesn't matter how many black and hispanics vote Democrat. If they are in a red state, they are still in the minority.

You can be in the minority yet still make up a major (if not, majority) part of the out of wedlock births. Blakcs are in the minorities, yet make up a huge chunk of murders in this country. So, why would it be a stretch to suggest that blacks (and ) can compose a mayor portion of out of wedlock births, even in red states?

The stats you cite are incomplete, because they're measured based on BIRTHS. Much like the unemployed who stop looking for work aren't counted in the BLS' overall unemployment rate, the teen pregnancy stat does NOT count girls who get knocked up but don't birth them babies.

And, to no one's surprise, the abortion rates are significantly higher in blue states than in red ones.

This week Slate featured a piece by Amanda Marcotte discussing why New York has lower teen-birth rates than Mississippi. Not surprisingly, Marcotte blames abstinence-only sex education programs in Mississippi and praises New York’s contraceptive-friendly policies. She favorably mentions a pilot program recently started in New York public schools which allows students to obtain contraception — including emergency contraception — directly from the school. Of course, as New York Times columnist Ross Douthat pointed out, Marcotte forgot something. A major reason why New York has a lower teen birthrate is because New York teens are far more likely to abort unwanted pregnancies. Mississippi has a pro-life parental-involvement law in effect, while New York has none.

Now in fairness to Marcotte, Mississippi still has a higher teen-pregnancy rate than New York. However, she, like countless other mainstream-media pundits, is wrong to blame Mississippi’s sex-education policies for the disparity. Many journalists point to the high teen-pregnancy rates in “red” states as proof that abstinence-only sex education programs are ineffective. However, this analysis is flawed for several reasons. First, not every southern school district has adopted abstinence-only sex education. Second, poverty rates are a key determinant in teen-pregnancy rates and many southern states have a high incidence of poverty. Third, the average age of marriage is much lower in many southern states, so some percentage of these teen pregnancies are carried by older teens who are married.